Low-performing schools face review

The first 34 schools the state tagged as among its lowest-achieving and least-improving in 2010 will soon reach the end of the three years they had to show improvement.

The schools, labeled Level 4 on a scale of 5, could be eligible to move out of that status next fall.

But any new designation would not have any bearing on whether the schools continue to receive federal school improvement grants targeted at the nation’s lowest performing schools.

In Worcester, for instance, Union Hill and Chandler Elementary Community schools became Level 4 schools in 2010, but it took another year for them to apply and qualify for a three-year federal school improvement grant. That grant brings roughly $400,000 to each of the two schools annually. Most of that goes to pay teachers for an extended school day and for extra training sessions, according to Superintendent Melinda J. Boone.

Union Hill, which has had two years of improved test scores, could qualify to move out of Level 4 status next year, but it would still have another year under the federal grant, state and local officials said yesterday at a special meeting of the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Chandler Elementary, which saw strong improvement the first year and less the second, seems less likely to move out of Level 4 status. However, state education staff said schools will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Almost three-quarters of the original 34 Level 4 schools look to be on track to meet test score improvement goals, provided they continue to make gains on the coming spring’s Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System tests. Test scores will be only part of Commissioner Mitchell D. Chester’s consideration about whether to change the designation. The other criteria include information from annual monitoring visits from SchoolWorks, a Beverly-based contractor making the visits on the state’s behalf. Those visits would look at a variety of conditions and whether the district can sustain the improvements.

Most Level 4 districts need to make “significant progress” in embedding the conditions that made improvement possible and creating district systems to sustain it, said Jesse Dixon, a special assistant to Senior Associate Commissioner Lynda Foisy. That includes drawing up a plan to continue funding necessary improvements after the federal grant ends.

State Education Secretary S. Paul Reville of Worcester expressed worries that districts will return to old funding patterns. “If we come back to a model where everybody’s getting the same thing, it didn’t work before” and is unlikely to work again, he said.

One possible source of that money is Title 1, federal money directed at low-income children. When Massachusetts received a waiver from some of the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, it gave districts more flexibility in how they spend the portion of Title 1 money they previously had to set aside for after-school academic support. The money must still be used for academic interventions, but it could be during or after the school day, Ms. Boone said. Worcester is still figuring out exactly which services it will provide.

Meanwhile, other federal grants have decreased, Ms. Boone said.

The state plans to be cautious about pulling schools out of Level 4 status. The state will “err on keeping it (a school) in Level 4 to prevent the undoing of the progress that has been made,” Mr. Dixon said.

Schools could remain at Level 4, be bumped up, or be bumped down to Level 5, which would put them in receivership.

As part of last night’s meeting, superintendents from three Level 4 districts — Ms. Boone, Meg Mayo-Brown of Fall River and Jean M. Franco of Lowell — spoke to the board about the Level 4 process.

Ms. Mayo-Brown said that unlike a charter school leader she spoke to recently, labor contracts and her school committee mean she can’t “turn on a dime.”

Ms. Boone said that teacher contracts “still are an impediment to doing this work well” and noted that finding money for central administrators who could help support schools the way the state would like has been a hard sell when public opinion wants as many dollars as possible to go directly into classrooms.

The state board will recap yesterday’s discussion at its meeting today in Lawrence.